Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The set of utterances in a language should not be regarded as finite

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Human cognitive and physical constraints entail that any actual language use is bounded by finite biological lifespans and memory limits.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A theory of language should model the actual communicative capacities of finite beings, not idealized abstract systems divorced from cognitive reality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Chomsky's competence/performance distinction does not justify positing infinite sets when performance data is necessarily finite and bounded.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Elegance and parsimony in grammar are aesthetic-pragmatic criteria for theory selection, not metaphysical facts about the nature of language.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Preferring infinite generative grammars on grounds of elegance commits the fallacy of mistaking theoretical convenience for ontological commitment about what language is.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Insisting on a finite language would require including highly arbitrary and numerical conditions in the grammar
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A grammar should be set up in an uncluttered and maximally elegant way
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.